Try a parametric eq to tighten up a rectifier!!!!!

[firmani99]

I have a dual and triple as well as a mark iv and v. I love them all but the mark's are noticeably tighter as everyone knows. I know it's common to tighten a rectifier with a boost pedal but I am not crazy about that sound and the compression that it adds. I have an EMG 81 equipped guitar and a jackson with JB's. The JB's sound killer on the mark but get too loose and "slow" sounding with the rectifier. The EMG's sound way tighter on the rectifier but again I'm not crazy about the compressed "narrow" sound.

This got me thinking. I am pretty confident that it is the lack of bass in the signal chain more so than the actual boost that is tightening the rectifier up. A TS-9 and 808 cut quite a bit of lows and the EMG 81's also have way less low end output than the JB's so I started experimenting. I put a parametric eq between the amp and guitar (with JB's) I set the low cut to wide at 80Hz and about -6 to -8. I also bring back in some of the low end with the bass knob on the rectifier. (which is post gain stages) Similar to the way you would on a mark. Holy **** you wouldn't believe the difference!!

I can tighten up the rectifier without the compression! It actually sounds slightly more Markish while retaining the Rectifier tone. I know the thick low end is part of the rectifiers tone and character but the best part about it is that you can dial in as much cut or as little cut as you want. As well as switch it in and out. I only got to experiment with it for a few hours but so far I am in love. I am going to be doing more experimenting with different frequencies etc.

I highly recommend trying it. If I were designing the next Rectifier I would include 2 bass knobs. One pre gain and one post.

 

[dearco19]

Nice findings! What parametric are you using? Have you tried it in the FX loop?

 

[firmani99]

I am actually using a parametric eq that is built into my GSP 1101. I am running it in the 4 cable method and I have the eq set before the preamp section of my rectifier. I am going to try it with my rane rack mount too.

You could definitely tweak your tone with an eq in the loop however you would not be able to tighten up the sound this way because that places the eq after the gain stages.

 

[dearco19]

Alright! Got it. Thanks for tip, I will try it

 

[firmani99]

Cool! Hope it works out for you. I think you'll like the results.

 

[SonVolt]

What JB are you using that you think it has more bass than EMGs? JB is known for lacking any semblance of bass.

 

[firmani99]

It's a TB-4. Way more bass than both of my 81 equipped guitars. By general standards it may not have tons of bass but definitely more than the EMG's. Maybe it's the guitar that it's mounted in. Its a jackson king v. Not the most expensive one but not the cheapest either. I am not sure what it's made off.

 

[Eevil]

Well... I had a same kind of dilemma with Les Paul JB/Jazz combination. In gig situation changing the guitars from strat to LP was really frustrating experience: All the tones were "OOOMMPPHHFFF" and the feeling was gooey to play. I had a Mark III head with 1x12 thiele before and had similar problems with that also. The tones were so different in live situations that it was really hard to live with. The same problem persisted in my new Roadster stack also.

I read from this forum to adjust the pickups in guitar to remedy this. I adjusted the pickups a bit lower in LP and it really did not help. After some time I started thinking about this nuisance again and was planning to swap pickups. Maybe the Jazz/jazz combination, but... I'm kinda out of resources at the moment so no joy... So I tought "Maybe I'll just adjust the pickups again - this time I'll just overdo it!" So first I played a good bit with strat and adjusted the amp with that one. After that I picked up the LP and started tinkering with pickups. I lowered both PUs about 7-10mm lower and raised the pole pieces 3-4mm in a way that thinner strings have poles a bit closer than thicker (1st and 4th string have highest and 6th and 3rd have lowest poles)...

And after this adjustment the LP really started to work properly with the amp. The tone is not "OOMPPHHFF" anymore and the feel is opened up, there's a lot more air and clarity in all channels. Also the bass is not overwhelming anymore. Basically this was the key to get more useable tones out of my setup Earlier I also changed the powertubes to JJ EL34 to get more harmonics and less rumble...

Long story short: Lower the pickups

My setup is guitar-> Roadster head -> Mesa 4x12 recto traditional.

 

[afu]

I talk about similar things here: http://forum.grailtone.com/viewtopic.php?f=24&t=68384

I use my parametric EQ in the loop, but the sculpting is a similar idea. Since I posted that, I've been changing some of the settings.

I've been trying to get a general Metallica tone. I'm cutting heavily, a little short of wide band at 41Hz and boosting a very narrow band to taste wherever the sweet spot is. Since Metallica has such a massive low end, 79 or 84Hz is the current spot. By leaving the bass control at noon and sculpting frequencies in post, there's no additional preamp gain in the lows, but I keep that sagging, shredded beef sound. I'm getting the boom without the flub/fart. By boosting somewhere in the neighborhood of 4k (+/-500Hz) it's accenting the pick attack, which helps when the bass is so dominant.

The Tube Screamer has a mid-hump around 720Hz. It isn't that it's cutting the bass as much as it is pushing the mids so far up, the bass loses prominence. For every 6dB of push in the mids, the frequencies beyond it's roll off point begin to fade. It seems like semantics, but that push is the in-yo-face sound. The sound we've grown accustomed to as a natural, "flat", EQ on an A/B class amp actually has a prominent dip in the mids.

When I had my EQ up front, I did the same cut you did and I felt neutered after some A/B-ing. My two cents is to roll the frequency down until the sound you don't want comes back. Then, roll it back up 2 or 3 intervals. Anything below your speaker's audible range is chaff. So, chopping off most anything below 50 to 60 Hz and making a very slight roll off or cut at the frequencies above that point will remedy a lot of the problem, but keep the sound pretty full.

 

[firmani99]

Both of those are great points! I am going to experiment with different frequencies.

I am also going to try to lower my pickups. I do think I run them kind of high. But I really love the punchy powerful sound I get out of those pickups with the mark iv and v.

 

[ryjan]

Funny how James Hetfield can get the "Metallica Sound" with a Mark IIC+, Mark IV, Triaxis, Dual/Triple Recto, VH4, and any other amp he plays.
Some would say that it's a hint that technique plays more into it than hardware. :wink:

 

[afu]

Ryjan, yep. His pick attack and muting are very unique. That's why I just try to ballpark it so I sound good playing his songs. AJFA (song) and Sad But True are my references.

Firmani99, the Randall Satan has a separate section to control gain for bass and treble- aside from overall gain. Then the power section has deep and presence control. That thing looks impressive. I would love to see Mesa do a similar control scheme, since their take on these sorts of things is almost always sublime.

 

[Dino.]

I've had my DR for about a year now and have tried everything to try to get the sound I was looking for. A TS9 helped a lot but it was still lacking. Then I added a Mesa 5-band EQ pedal to my board and WOW!, what a difference!

The DR is a great amp but there's so much more Mesa could have done to make it better, IMO.

 

[afu]

I've had my DR for about a year now and have tried everything to try to get the sound I was looking for. A TS9 helped a lot but it was still lacking. Then I added a Mesa 5-band EQ pedal to my board and WOW!, what a difference!

The DR is a great amp but there's so much more Mesa could have done to make it better, IMO.

I think and feel the Recto was meant to be a loose, swampy, beast. It's lineage seems to stem as much from a Bassman as any Marshall or the SLO. They already had a super tight amp with the Mark IV. The DR seems to be a homage to late 50s, early 60s amps, while taking them into what was to be the new millennium. If one doesn't crank the gain, the treble can be turned up a little and the bass becomes much less prominent.

While the tone stack for channels 2 and 3 are basically Marshall, the settings in the handbook have a feel that is more like an old Fender on steroids. It's a half-breed, maybe. I could be way off.

 

[ryjan]

Running a Recto with EL34's will really tighten it up as well. It almost feels and sounds like it's boosted a bit because of the increased mid range and tighter bass tracking.

 

[Eevil]

Firmani99, the Randall Satan has a separate section to control gain for bass and treble- aside from overall gain. Then the power section has deep and presence control. That thing looks impressive. I would love to see Mesa do a similar control scheme, since their take on these sorts of things is almost always sublime.

Well... That's the Mesa Mark III layout. All basic tone controls shape the tone before hitting the drive and GEQ is for post-drive tone shaping... it also includes deep and presence

 

[afu]

I tried a new setting and got some good results. I only have three EQ bands to play with and wanted a cutting, metal sound to play around with.

Bass: 11 or less
Mid: 1-2
Treble: 1-2
Presence 10-1 (depending on opposite of relative treble)

Cut 3-5dB, .9 octave at 43 Hz
Boost 3-6dB, .5 octave at 87 Hz
Cut 4dB, .3 octave at 487 Hz

The two bass settings work to bump the bass at it's (lowered) peak, but pull the rumble-y bits down. The narrow, low-mid cut is roughly around the center of the lower curve, but leaves the EQ boost on the decline/incline alone.

The cut centered around 43 Hz is very subtle. If you needed a band elsewhere, this is the one to move. If I had one more band, I'd play with the presence.